Al Queda is not a group but a fast spreading new way of thinking.

Just been watching RT and a female journalist interviewing some Sheik about Syria and Lebanon. (Couldn't catch his name but he told her he had
studied religion, was married) in short, the ideal Arabic religious authorative citizen. He had a problem with Lebanon because it had allowed
democracy and allowed people the right to chose what they wanted to follow there - which was clearly not his way).

She asked if Al Queda was present where they were and he laughed and explained it was everywhere, also in the USA and UK etc because today it is now
a way of thinking. She posed the question after the interview 'which was more dangerous, a group of men or an idea?' and decided the idea was far
more dangerous.

With this idea I assume that fighting and forcing issues on people will be the new tactic, hence movements towards radicalisation by muslims in
Birmingham schools. At the moment they are not powerful enough so we are having the sweet little la la of Islam is about love etc but with Al queda
ideology tapped on it certainly won't be peaceful.

Are we entering more dangerous times or are we simply living at a time when most of us are so disillusioned with the greediness of capitalism and our
governments making the rules for the people they govern up as they go along to suit themselves and the elite?

Wkill this increase people like the American Soldier and his family becoming adherents of an alternative ideology in our secular world, and do we
want an Arabic philosophy and dominance enforced upon us. Stealth when one is weak appears to be the action of the day and all Western countries are
having to make accommodating changes to their lives in order to meet muslim demands. Have we already gone to far?

Tyranny and using violence to force one's will on others is actually one of the oldest forms of thinking (or not thinking).

To defeat it we must educate others about why it isn't a valid solution, and to share alternative options to help others cope and deal with their
problems without resorting to violence. Essentially we have to help others find positive in their lives, or we will have to accept a cold desolate
world filled with hate and despair.

Al Qaeda never has been an "organisation". It's more like a franchise. Anybody can set up and call themselves "Al Qaeda", it's just like a brand.

They way to defeat fundamentalism is to allow free flow of ideas around the world, to let people realise that we are all humans.

That was happening to some extent - hell, the "hippie trail" in the 1970s used to go right through Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan - but once
extremists get into power they try to shut out the outside world and demonise the "outsiders".

And I'm not just talking about Muslim extremists here. Christian fundamentalists and right-wing extremists are doing exactly the same thing: trying to
shut out foreign people and foreign ideas, and cast them as "the enemy".

Al Qaeda is a culture fabricated by the Pre-CIA and Pre MI6 intel groups. It was used so that Zionists could put puppet dictators into the Middle East
for control. The Muslim Brotherhood, AlQaeda, etc would have no power if the West would stop financing their wars and putting WMD's into their hands.
Without our help, they would be nothing more than a few pissed off camel herders with sticks. You cant invade America with camels and sticks. A
tyrannical government cannot grow, let alone survive without external funding and support.

a reply to: Shiloh7
Interesting perspective... Thanks!
Most people, disgruntled with the current power-structure...want the tables turned in their favor.
Religion is one of the few schemas that purports to guarantee Outside Help in 'correcting/righting' wrongs & even punishing the wrong-doers.
If Islam was as dominant, historically, in Western lands, as others...we might be seeing the same kind of acceptance of Al Qaedaish
rhetoric.
Being familiar with Christianity - I have seen the same kind/s of fanatical revelry and fervor locking arms with any new charismatic mouthpiece...as
long as there was some divine assurance that Outside Help was...guaranteed.
Same thing with get-rich schemes.

Yes we in the Muslim community call them "khuawarij" they have adopted an extreme aqeeda (methodology ) that has become plouted with innovation . and
is very far of the sunna (teachings of Islam or straight path) .

The fact is that yes ! These extrem Muslims are everywhere but their are also educated Muslims like my self who try very hard to give these misguided
Muslims dawa (teachings about the sunna /Islam).

You must also understand that inside these groups like the Taliban , al nursa , ect ect , you have a breed of angry Muslims who are fighting because
they have family members who have been killed by the US and apostles . so naturally they go and fight and end up getting indoctrinated with these
"khwaraij " ideology..

Kharijites (Arabic: خوارج‎ Khawārij, literally "those who went out";[1] singular, Khārijī ) is a general term describing various Muslims
who, while initially supporting the authority of the final Rashidun Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib, the son-in-law and cousin of the Islamic prophet
Muhammad, then later rejected his leadership. They first emerged in the late 7th century, concentrated in today's southern Iraq, and are distinct from
Sunni Muslims and Shiʿa Muslims. With the passing of time the Kharijite groups fell greatly in their numbers and their beliefs did not continue to
gain any traction in future generations.

From their essentially political position, the Kharijites developed extreme doctrines that further set them apart from both mainstream Sunni and
Shiʿa Muslims. The Kharijites were particularly noted for adopting a radical approach to Takfir, whereby they declared other Muslims to be
unbelievers and therefore deemed them worthy of death. The Kharijites were also known historically as the Shurāh (الشُراة),[A] literally
meaning "the buyers" and understood within the context of Islamic scripture and philosophy to mean "those who have traded the mortal life (al-Dunya)
for the other life [with God] (al-Aakhirah)", which, unlike the term Kharijite, was one that many Kharijites used to describe themselves.

originally posted by: Rob48
Al Qaeda never has been an "organisation". It's more like a franchise. Anybody can set up and call themselves "Al Qaeda", it's just like a
brand.

They way to defeat fundamentalism is to allow free flow of ideas around the world, to let people realise that we are all humans.

That was happening to some extent - hell, the "hippie trail" in the 1970s used to go right through Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan - but once
extremists get into power they try to shut out the outside world and demonise the "outsiders".

And I'm not just talking about Muslim extremists here. Christian fundamentalists and right-wing extremists are doing exactly the same thing: trying
to shut out foreign people and foreign ideas, and cast them as "the enemy".

Humans are so small-minded, and it will be our downfall.

Exactly. Al Queda as it was barely exists anymore. Its leaders all dead etc. However many groups took up the name to gain international support and
funding for regional conflicts. Now there are many groups who use the name but, no over all coordination or plan exsists. I remember the early days
of Al Queda, they always had asperations beyond just regional issue which is what made them so appealing and well funded. There was a time when they
were just one group among many that only people in the intelligence community had ever heard of.

I think it's fair to say Al Qaeda is a banner and ideal now more than anything, and in pursuing both wars badly in overall political leadership,
we've essentially martyred the original core more than put down the fight.

I think A.Q., as Bin Laden had it running in the 90's, was as much defined by things like their affiliation with the training camp network and
ability to put people through that pipeline as it was anything Bin Laden himself ever could do as an individual. He did have a true organization with
real assets and real wealth at one time, before 9/11. Now? All that's gone.

Yemen has a piece of A.Q. gone on to build into it's own thing and Iraq has one. Al Nusra seems to identify with the ideology if nothing else..so it
sure lives on in that way.

I also think it's that ideal that many are trying to use as the mojo for the overall goal of another Caliphate. That's another thread tho.
Literally..

I agree with what you say but it doesn't take into account the psychopaths amongst us which appear to be about 1 in every 12 the number is so large.
However we don't see many of them because they are hiding in full public display - the people at the top who got there ruthlessly, destroying all in
their way.

You can see why the Taliban want no woman educated simply because her voice at home would start a revolution against their ideology and it would
soften their dominance and success. Its interesting how the three desert religions try to insist on segregation between men and women and how women
are banned from either sitting downstairs in the synagogue with the men, attending the mosque for prayers. (I know we have female Rabbis albeit not
in all groups and IMHO that is a forward thinking and balancing mix more reflective of real life than some ancient clinical rule book - shame the
Catholics and Islam for not moving to balance out their still sterile religious ideas.

Once an ideology gets a hold in one's head though it becomes a very dangerous thing and if its being pushed how long before it enters the young's
heads - which we see already in truth with them diving out of the West to fight in Syria and other places in the world. Bombs are the bread and
butter of Al Queda and they are being ujsed all round the Westernised world to frighten and erode our will for freedom.

a reply to: mikeone718
Mr Spad, Sorry I replied to the guy who replied to you by mistake, not ignorring your view.

I disagree having heard it from a Muslim's mouth - perhaps you should tell that to the Muslims as clearly they are a very clever people, well financed
for warfare against the West - provided it doesn't stop us buying oil of course!

This ideology is spreading probably through the mosques into men's minds - and the West is thinking about the image of Bin Laden so much posted by the
media (we all know what he looks like and what he wears). Al Queda not only had men fighting - looking like Bin etc but it had an ideology which most
muslims use to ignore if they were Westernised, but the West is now seen for its exploitation of ordinary people and its control against protestors
etc so many people are quietly thinking about what way of life is the best? At the moment we appear to have no middle of the road ideology on offer
due to dissatisfaction in the West and oppression and/or war in the ME etc.

I suspect governments would wish people would be as supportive of them as opposed to the support they arfe blinded into giv ing to their religious
ideals.

I do think today that religion needs to be held to account and the people who push its fundamentalism held responsible alongside their 'disciples and
minions' when it comes to the acts they carry out against ordinary and non-believer alike.

I do agree because we are allowing huge groups of Muslims to come to live in Western countries and it appears the parents don't know anything about
their sons activities before he suddenly trips off to war to murder, main and rape. This kind of life in truth is pretty much unheard of except in
very small numbers of mostly ex soldiers (due to their training) who become professional mercenaries as that is all they are trained for). These men
have not been polluted in their thinking usually to turn on the societies that have protected and provided for them probably since they were born.

When a religious man's thinking is so opposed to the society he lives in, should we be surprised he may turn against it with devastating consequences
- perhaps we should ask ourselves can we all live together today or was it more peaceful and safe before our governments tried this experiment.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.